Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 693 posts

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#581

Post by elihu »

jpadkins wrote: post #468
mortureb wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Don’t these billion dollar machines have a GPS tracker on them?

I don't think stealth aircrafts normally have trackers or anything broadcasting a signal. Kind of defeats the purpose... I did read that stealth aircraft have transponders installed when operating in US airspace, so commercial radar can see them better. But it was not installed on this flight.

The article mentions that they have transponders that can be used but apparently in this case it was off or not working. They can also attach a radar reflectors when they want to be more visible to radar, and apparently the weapons configuration plays a role too:

> "Also, the jet's configuration and its avionics' operability are an issue. The F-35s wear radar reflectors when on transit flights, as well as on many training missions and some operational ones. The Marine jets often wear missile rails for AIM-9Xs, as well. But if the aircraft was in its full stealthy configuration and had avionics issues, tracking it may have been troublesome."

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#582

Post by elihu »

valec wrote: post #185
brobdingnagians wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read some analyses of the F35 vs A10 which don't favour the F35 for CAS operations much. The main thing I saw was that F35 requires more maintenance and longer runways than the A10 and is more fragile. It depends on what kind of a war that is being fought, but in a major great power war, you couldn't always guarantee having nice high quality air bases, runways, and support teams near the front. Sometimes it is p…

The F-35 has a much faster response time than the A-10--and, more importantly, survivability. In a contested environment, "suboptimal" CAS from an F-35 dropping precision munitions is much better than non at all (A-10 would get shot out of the sky by any near-peer before it could approach the theater). The A-10 also has high maintenance costs and a relatively low loiter time. For fighting terrorists in flipflops, som…

> "The A-10 also has high maintenance costs..."

Isn't the A-10 the cheapest-to-operate combat jet the U.S. uses?

I mean, maybe you could argue that you get more capability per dollar for some other platform, but A-10s aren't expensive. (Or at least, historically they aren't. Maybe they've been getting more expensive because the airframes are so old.)

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#583

Post by elihu »

dragontamer wrote: post #209
brobdingnagians wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read some analyses of the F35 vs A10 which don't favour the F35 for CAS operations much. The main thing I saw was that F35 requires more maintenance and longer runways than the A10 and is more fragile. It depends on what kind of a war that is being fought, but in a major great power war, you couldn't always guarantee having nice high quality air bases, runways, and support teams near the front. Sometimes it is p…

The replacement for the A10 is the AC-130. F35 is the multirole fighter. You build it because you don't know if you are doing a stealth mission, a dogfight, CAS or wild weasel. F35 can do it all, but as a jack of all trades master of none. ------- Consider the A10 in the current Ukrainian war: CAS is impossible because both sides have too much antiair. You need wild weasel (aka: anti-air defense) fighters right now.…

> "Consider the A10 in the current Ukrainian war: CAS is impossible because both sides have too much antiair."

Not really. It's true that anti-air has prevented aircraft from dominating the battlefield, but both sides still use jets and helicopters to come in at low altitude, fire off a bunch of rockets, do a quick U-turn (releasing a bunch of flares) and run away.

Both sides use MI-8s and SU-25s. Not sure if Ukraine has MI-28s, but Russia does. Both sides use glide bombs to hit fortified defense lines.

The Russian KA-52s in particular have been very effective lately because they have guided missiles and night vision equipment, and don't even have to be very close to the front.

If MI-8s, MI-28s, SU-25s, and KA-52s are all being actively used in this war and aren't immediately shot down, I don't see why an A-10 would fare any worse in that situation. Might not be a game-changer, but not useless either.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#584

Post by unnouinceput »

Quote: "The jet’s transponder, which usually helps locate the aircraft, was not working “for some reason that we haven’t yet determined,” said Jeremy Huggins, a spokesman at Joint Base Charleston.

That's such a convenient event, isn't it? I mean, this screams of a middle manager screw-up and what is the best way to cover your financial losses (read embezzlement) other than staging a bank robbery, a fire or losing a jet? Yeah, that's my 2 cents conspiracy theory.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#585

Post by _djo_ »

sunnybeetroot wrote: post #571
_djo_ wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, yes it would be a security risk. Second, AirTags depend on there being a set number of iOS devices nearby to provide location data and an internet connection. You're not going to get that in a rural area.

Alright maybe not an AirTag but a Tile tag would surely work?

It operates on the exact same principle. So, no.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#586

Post by benterix »

tomcam wrote: post #569
MarkMarine wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, I read every incident report for military in the US because it was part of my job. Since we were talking about US military aviation I felt that was the avenue. I have read every incident report for Russia, not that I even could.

Always the straight man, I asked, what’s your job? It sounds unreasonably interesting to me.

I have a strange feeling that Mark was a Marine.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#588

Post by voxadam »

andbberger wrote: post #513
rmbyrro wrote: post #504

> "How in the hell do you lose an F-35? ... How is there not a tracking device...?" -- South Carolina Republican Representative Nancy Mace Considering it is a stealth jet, broadcasting its location through easily detectable radio waves would be a serious bug, not a feature, wouldn't it?

stealth aircraft usually fly with radar retroreflectors deployed when not on combat missions so as to prevent adversaries from assessing their cross-section

How Luneburg lens radar reflectors are used to make stealth aircraft visible on radar screens[0]

[0] https://theaviationgeekclub.com/these-devices-make-stealth-a...

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#590

Post by throwaway2037 »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #233
pjc50 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX is not fully under operational control of the US government, if some of the reports from Twitter about geofencing are to be believed.

Which is partly why the DoD commissioned a second constellation specifically for military use: https://www.spacex.com/starshield/

Wow. Is there any concrete info about the build-out? Or do you think they will just provision X% of existing sats / bandwidth to military use? I recall learning years ago that modern "long lines" (telco) were all pure data lines, where a certain portion was reserved for guaranteed bandwidth required for (voice) telephone calls.
Post reply on HN